Re: Rendlesham Stage 1 Conclusions - Bruni

From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2001 14:46:20 -0000
Fwd Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2001 10:58:05 -0500
Subject: Re: Rendlesham Stage 1 Conclusions - Bruni
>From: Tim Matthews <TMMatthews99@aol.com>
>Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 18:59:04 EST
>Subject: Rendlesham Stage 1 Conclusions
>To: ufoupdates@home.com
Tim Matthews wrote:
>5 - Many things trouble us including the allegations that
>Margaret Thatcher indicated that UFOs were a big issue and/or
>that she knew anything about Rendlesham.
Margaret Thatcher said exactly what I quoted her as saying,
nothing more, nothing less. Rendlesham was not even mentioned.
Please read my book where the conversation is explained in more
detail.
>We have a letter, dated 12th November 2001, from the former
>PM's Personal Assistant, telling us that, having worked with
>Mrs. Thatcher for some time, she is often heard to say, "you
>must get your facts right."
Well, there you have it then. I have never worked for Thatcher
so I don't know what words she so often uses. I just know that
she used those exact words when she answered my questions
concerning the UFO problem.
>Furthermore, we are told that, "You should not read much into"
>the statements about getting facts right and "You can't tell the
>people."
Really!. Well, did Thatcher's PA offer any explanation why her
boss should use these words (some she so often uses) and yet you
are told not to read too much into them. So when Thatcher talks
to people in government or otherwise, telling them that they
must have their facts, is she not to be taken seriously?
And isn't it _very_ interesting that the PA did not deny that
Thatcher said these words to me, especially "You can't tell the
people". Even more to the point is the subject matter which
prompted these responses. UFO's.
>For Georgina Bruni to suggest that Mrs. Thatcher/her PA
>"would say that wouldn't she" means that, in effect, Thatcher
>cannot be relied upon to tell the truth in the first place!
>Georgina's use of Margaret Thatcher is, therefore, is NOT
>justified.
I do not agree with that statement from you. I simply meant that
there is no way that Margaret Thatcher would admit to that
conversation. I did not say that she would deny it ever took
place. You have to understand the repercussions if she admitted
to it, which I doubt she would ever do. I certainly respect her
for not denying it though.
>6 - Given the vague and almost meaningless comments made by Mrs.
>T we are interested to know rather more about the circumstances
>in which these comments were made, times, dates, places etc. As
>a journalist I would have taken either shorthand notes or made a
>recording, especially if I was going to ask specifically about
>UFOs.
First of all, there was nothing vague or meaningless about that
conversation, or indeed her comments. I would have thought that
needed no explanation.
The details of this event were given to my publisher and certain
respected journalists. You say that you would have taken notes
or made a recording if you were going to ask specific questions
about UFO's. Well, let me fill you in on a few facts. You have
obviously not paid attention to my book, in which I explain what
took place that evening.
I was a guest that evening at a table of lawyers. I did not talk
to Baroness Thatcher until the end of dinner. I had no intention
of discussing UFOs, I was in a conversation with her that was
very private, the conversation went on for about ten minutes. It
was only when she said: 'It's these private things that the
people don't know about that make the Conservative party so
good," that I realised that was an ideal opening to ask her to
comment concerning some interviews I had done with former
military personnel and scientists regarding back engineering of
alien technology and so on.... Because of the seriousness of our
previous conversation, and the fact that she knew I was a guest
at this very prestigious dinner, she obviously felt that she
could make these comments. So, your idea that I could have taken
notes or recorded that conversation is so ridiculous. It was not
planned! For your information, I was so amazed by what she had
said that I called Nick Pope at 2am, when I arrived home, and he
made notes.
>Georgina Bruni, who I quite like actually but who keeps claiming
>that I am attacking her, has made much of Mrs. T's comments and
>wrote to me suggesting that Macmillan, her publishers, must have
>been satisfied that she (Georgina) had accurately reflected her
>conversation with the former PM. Our view is that Macmillan,
>like other publishers, are only concerned to make money, to sell
>books. They are not taking a position as regards the evidence,
>only seeking to maximise sales via spin and clever marketing. I
>don't blame them.
You have obviously not worked with any major publishing house.
My publisher required a great deal of information from me,
including details of the Thatcher meeting. I gave them a list of
the prestigious guests and the names of the organisers, which
included the wife of a former Minister of State for Defence. The
only thing I cannot prove is the actual content of that
conversation because my only witness is Maggie's husband, Denis
Thatcher and possibly the two Special Branch protectors that
were standing close by.
By the way, The rest of your post is also based on speculation.
Best wishes
Georgina
Out now, the paperback version (Updated) "You Can't Tell The
People". The Definitive Account of the Rendlesham Forest UFO
Mystery by Georgina Bruni. Published by Pan Books (Macmillan)
Available in all good book shops and on-line at:
www.amazon.co.uk
UFO UpDates - Toronto - ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
A UFO & Related Phenomena E-Mail List operated by
Errol Bruce-Knapp
UFO UpDates Archives are available at:
http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates
'Strange Days...Indeed' - available 'live' via
Windows Media Player 10:00 Eastern, Saturday nights at:
http://cfrb.com/
Coming soon..... The Virtually Strange Nework